Integration of primary care and palliative care services to improve equality and equity at the end-of-life: Findings from realist stakeholder workshops.

BACKGROUND: Inequalities in access to palliative and end of life care are longstanding. Integration of primary and palliative care has the potential to improve equity in the community. Evidence to inform integration is scarce as research that considers integration of primary care and palliative care services is rare. AIM: To address the questions: 'how can inequalities in access to community palliative and end of life care be improved through the integration of primary and palliative care, and what are the benefits?' DESIGN: A theory-driven realist inquiry with two stakeholder workshops to explore how, when and why inequalities can be improved through integration. Realist analysis leading to explanatory context(c)-mechanism(m)-outcome(o) configurations(c) (CMOCs). FINDINGS: A total of 27 participants attended online workshops (July and September 2022): patient and public members (n = 6), commissioners (n = 2), primary care (n = 5) and specialist palliative care professionals (n = 14). Most were White British (n = 22), other ethnicities were Asian (n = 3), Black African (n = 1) and British mixed race (n = 1). Power imbalances and racism hinder people from ethnic minority backgrounds accessing current services. Shared commitment to addressing these across palliative care and primary care is required in integrated partnerships. Partnership functioning depends on trusted relationships and effective communication, enabled by co-location and record sharing. Positive patient experiences provide affirmation for the multi-disciplinary team, grow confidence and drive improvements. CONCLUSIONS: Integration to address inequalities needs recognition of current barriers. Integration grounded in trust, faith and confidence can lead to a cycle of positive patient, carer and professional experience. Prioritising inequalities as whole system concern is required for future service delivery and research.

The effectiveness of out-of-hours palliative care telephone advice lines: A rapid systematic review.

BACKGROUND: People with palliative care needs and their carers often rely on out-of-hours services to remain at home. Policymakers have recommended implementing telephone advice lines to ensure 24/7 access to support. However, the impact of these services on patient and carer outcomes, as well as the health care system, remains poorly understood. AIM: To evaluate the clinical- and cost-effectiveness of out-of-hours palliative care telephone advice lines, and to identify service characteristics associated with effectiveness. DESIGN: Rapid systematic review (PROSPERO ID: CRD42023400370) with narrative synthesis. DATA SOURCES: Three databases (Medline, EMBASE and CINAHL) were searched in February 2023 for studies of any design reporting on telephone advice lines with at least partial out-of-hours availability. Study quality was assessed using the Mixed Methods Appraisal Tool, and quantitative and qualitative data were synthesised narratively. RESULTS: Twenty-one studies, published 2000-2022, were included. Most studies were observational, none were experimental. While some evidence suggested that telephone advice lines offer guidance and reassurance, supporting care at home and potentially reducing avoidable emergency care use in the last months of life, variability in reporting and poor methodological quality across studies limit our understanding of patient/carer and health care system outcomes. CONCLUSION: Despite their increasing use, evidence for the clinical- and cost-effectiveness of palliative care telephone advice lines remains limited, primarily due to the lack of robust comparative studies. There is a need for more rigorous evaluations incorporating experimental or quasi-experimental methods and longer follow-up, and standardised reporting of telephone advice line models and outcomes, to guide policy and practice.

Telephone advice lines for adults with advanced illness and their family carers: a qualitative analysis and novel practical framework.

BACKGROUND: Telephone advice lines have been recommended internationally to support around-the-clock care for people living at home with advanced illness. While they undoubtedly support care, there is little evidence about what elements are needed for success. A national picture is needed to understand, improve and standardise service delivery/care. AIM: To explore telephone advice lines for people living at home with advanced illness across the four UK nations, and to construct a practical framework to improve services. DESIGN: A cross-national evaluation of telephone advice lines using structured qualitative interviews. A patient and public involvement workshop was conducted to refine the framework. SETTING/PARTICIPANTS: Professionals with responsibilities for how palliative care services are delivered and/or funded at a local or regional level, were purposively sampled. RESULTS: Seventy-one interviews were conducted, covering 60 geographical areas. Five themes were identified. Availability: Ten advice line models were described. Variation led to confusion about who to call and when. Accessibility, awareness and promotion: It was assumed that patients/carers know who to call out-of-hours, but often they did not. Practicalities: Call handlers skills/expertise varied, which influenced how calls were managed. Possible responses ranged from signposting to organising home visits. Integration/continuity of care: Integration between care providers was limited by electronic medical records access/information sharing. Service structure/commissioning: Sustained funding was often an issue for charitably funded organisations. CONCLUSIONS: Our novel evidence-based practical framework could be transformative for service design/delivery, as it presents key considerations relating to the various elements of advice lines that may impact on the patient/carer experience.

Advance care planning before and during COVID-19: evaluation of 73,675 patients' records.

BACKGROUND: Advance care planning (ACP) was encouraged by policymakers throughout the COVID-19 pandemic. Little is known about use of ACP during this time. AIM: To compare use of ACP before and during the COVID-19 pandemic. DESIGN & SETTING: Retrospective, observational cohort study, comparing the creation, use and content of Electronic Palliative Care Co-ordination System records in London. Individuals aged 18+ with a Coordinate My Care Record, created and published in the pre-pandemic period (01/01/2018-31/12/2019), Wave1 (W1) (20/03/2020-04/07/2020), and Wave2 (W2) (01/10/2020-05/03/2021). METHOD: Patient demographics and components of ACP were compared using descriptive and comparative statistics. RESULTS: 73,675 records were included; 35,108 pre-pandemic, 21,235 W1, 9,925 W2. Most records were created in primary care (56% pre-COVID, 76% in W1 and 48% in W2).Compared to the pre-pandemic period, the average weekly number of records created increased by 297% W1 (P<0.005) and 29.1% W2 (P<0.005). Patients with records created during the pandemic were younger (61% aged 80+ W1, 59% W2, 65% pre-pandemic (P<0.005)). Patients with records created in W1 had longer estimated prognoses at record creation (73% had an estimated prognosis of 1 year+ W1 vs 53% pre-pandemic (P<0.005)) and were more likely to be "For Resuscitation" (38% W1 vs 30% pre-pandemic (P<0.005)). CONCLUSION: During the COVID-19 pandemic, increased ACP activity was observed, especially in primary care, and for younger people and those not imminently dying. Further research is needed to identify training and planning requirements as well as organisational and system changes to support sustained high-quality ACP within primary care.

A framework for more equitable, diverse, and inclusive Patient and Public Involvement for palliative care research.

BACKGROUND: There are marked inequalities in palliative care provision. Research is needed to understand how such inequalities can be addressed, so that everyone living with advanced illness can receive the care they need, when they need it. Research into inequalities in palliative care should be guided by Patient and Public Involvement (PPI) that includes people from diverse backgrounds, who are less likely to receive specialist services. Multi-disciplinary research partnerships, bringing together primary care (the main providers of palliative care to diverse communities) and specialist palliative care, have the potential to work together in new ways to do research to address inequalities and improve palliative care in practice. This report describes a research partnership between primary care and palliative care that aimed to: (1) create opportunities for more inclusive PPI in palliative care research, (2) co-design new resources to support more equitable, diverse and inclusive PPI for palliative care, (3) propose a new framework for inclusive PPI in palliative care research. METHODS: PPI members were recruited via primary care and palliative care research networks from three diverse areas of the UK. A pragmatic, collaborative approach was taken to achieve the partnership aims. Online workshops were carried out to understand barriers to inclusive PPI in palliative care and to co-design resources. Evaluation included a "you said, we did" impact log and a short survey. The approach was informed by good practice principles from previous PPI, and existing theory relating to equity, equality, diversity, and inclusion. RESULTS: In total, 16 PPI members were recruited. Most were White British (n = 10), other ethnicities were Asian (n = 4), Black African (n = 1) and British mixed race (n = 1). The research team co-ordinated communication and activities, leading to honest conversations about barriers to inclusive PPI. Resources were co-designed, including a role description for an Equity, Equality, Diversity and Inclusion Champion, a "jargon buster", an animation and an online recipe book ( http://www.re-equipp.co.uk/ ) to inform future PPI. Learning from the partnership has been collated into a new framework to inform more inclusive PPI for future palliative care research. CONCLUSION: Collaboration and reciprocal learning across a multi-disciplinary primary care and palliative care research partnership led to the development of new approaches and resources. Research team commitment, shared vision, adequate resource, careful planning, relationship building and evaluation should underpin approaches to increase equality, diversity and inclusivity in future PPI for palliative care research.

Research is needed to understand how inequalities in palliative care can be addressed, so that everyone living with advanced illness can receive the care they need. Research into inequalities in palliative care should be guided by Patient and Public Involvement (PPI) that includes people from diverse backgrounds, who are less likely to receive specialist palliative care. Primary care services are grounded in the community they serve and can be the main providers of palliative care, but this is rarely the focus of research. Primary care and palliative care researchers can work together in new ways to do research to address inequalities and improve palliative care in practice. This paper describes the work of the RE-EQUIPP (REducing inEQUalities through Integration of Primary and Palliative Care) Care Partnership. The partnership involved researchers from primary care and palliative care working with people with lived experience of serious illness as patient or carer from three diverse areas of the United Kingdom: (1) London, (2) inner-city Sheffield and (3) Worthing in Sussex, a rural, coastal setting. The project provided opportunity to develop new ways of working and resources for more inclusive and equitable PPI for future palliative care research. Sixteen PPI members from diverse backgrounds and with a range of experience joined the partnership. Workshops were held to understand the barriers to inclusive PPI. New roles and resources were developed, including an Equity, Equality, Diversity and Inclusion Champion role, a "jargon buster", an animation, and an online recipe book to inform future PPI. Learning from the partnership was used to develop a new framework, which is presented to inform inclusive PPI for palliative care research in the future. This outlines the need for research team commitment and shared vision, adequate resource, careful planning, relationship building and evaluation.

Survival and critical care use among people with dementia in a large English cohort.

BACKGROUND: Admitting people with dementia to critical care units may not always lead to a clear survival benefit. Critical care admissions of people with dementia vary across countries. Little is known about the use and trends of critical care admissions of people with dementia in England. OBJECTIVE: To investigate critical care use and survival among people with dementia in a large London catchment area. METHODS: A retrospective cohort study using data from dementia assessment services in south London, UK (2007-20) linked with national hospitalisation data to ascertain critical care admissions. Outcomes included age-sex-standardised critical care use and 1-year post-critical care admission survival by dementia severity (binary: mild versus moderate/severe). We used logistic regression and Kaplan-Meier survival plots for investigating 1-year survival following a critical care admission and linear regressions for time trends. RESULTS: Of 19,787 people diagnosed with dementia, 726 (3.7%) had ≥1 critical care admission at any time after receiving their dementia diagnosis. The overall 1-year survival of people with dementia, who had a CCA, was 47.5% (n = 345). Dementia severity was not associated with 1-year survival following a critical care admission (mild dementia versus moderate-severe dementia odds of 1-year mortality OR: 0.90, 95% CI [0.66-1.22]). Over the 12-year period from 2008 to 2019, overall critical care use decreased (ß = -0.05; 95% CI = -0.01, -0.0003; P = 0.03), while critical care admissions occurring during the last year of life increased (ß = 0.11, 95% CI = 0.01, 0.20, P = 0.03). CONCLUSIONS: In this cohort, while critical care use among people with dementia declined overall, its use increased among those in their last year of life. Survival remains comparable to that observed in general older populations.

Advance Care Planning and Place of Death During the COVID-19 Pandemic: A Retrospective Analysis of Routinely Collected Data.

Increased advance care planning was endorsed at the start of the Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic with the aim of optimizing end-of-life care. This retrospective observational cohort study explores the impact of advanced care planning on place of death. 21,962 records from patients who died during the first year of the pandemic and who had an Electronic Palliative Care Coordination System record were included. 11,913 (54%) had a documented place of death. Of these 5,339 died at home and 2,378 died in hospital. 9,971 (45%) had both a documented place of death and a preferred place of death. Of these, 7,668 (77%) died in their preferred location. Documented elements of advance care planning, such as resuscitation status and ceiling of treatment decisions, were associated with an increased likelihood of dying in the preferred location, as were the number of times the record was viewed. During the COVID-19 pandemic, advanced care planning and the use of digital care coordination systems presented an opportunity for patients and healthcare staff to personalize care and influence end-of-life experiences.

Exploring access to community care and emergency department use among people with dementia: A qualitative interview study with people with dementia, and current and bereaved caregivers.

OBJECTIVES: Emergency department (ED) attendance is common among people with dementia and associated with poor health outcomes. Literature suggests a link between access to community care and the ED, but we know little about the mechanisms behind this link. This study aimed to explore experiences of accessing community and emergency care among people affected by dementia. METHODS: Informed by critical realism, semi-structured online and telephone interviews were conducted with people with dementia and family caregivers, with and without experience of using the ED. Participants were recruited from across the United Kingdom using purposive sampling with maximum variation. A mostly experiential reflexive thematic analysis approach was used, applying the candidacy model of access to deepen interpretation. RESULTS: Two dyad and 33 individual interviews were conducted with 10 people with dementia, 11 current caregivers and 16 bereaved caregivers (men = 11, 70-89 years = 18, white ethnicity = 32). Three themes are reported: (1) Navigating a 'push system', (2) ED as the 'last resort', and (3) Taking dementia 'seriously'. Themes describe a discrepancy between the configuration of services and the needs of people affected by dementia, who resort to the ED in the absence of accessible alternatives. Underlying this discrepancy is a lack of systemic prioritisation of dementia and wider societal stigma. CONCLUSION: Although a last resort, ED attendance is frequently the path of least resistance for people with dementia who encounter multiple barriers for timely, responsive access to community health and social care. Greater systemic prioritisation of dementia as a life-limiting condition may help to reduce reliance on the ED through essential development of post-diagnostic care, from diagnosis to the end of life.

Deaths at home, area-based deprivation and the effect of the Covid-19 pandemic: An analysis of mortality data across four nations.

BACKGROUND: The number and proportion of home deaths in the UK increased during the Covid-19 pandemic. It is not known whether these changes were experienced disproportionately by people from different socioeconomic groups. AIM: To examine the association between home death and socioeconomic position during the Covid-19 pandemic, and how this changed between 2019 and 2020. DESIGN: Retrospective cohort study using population-based individual-level mortality data. SETTING/PARTICIPANTS: All registered deaths in England, Wales, Scotland and Northern Ireland. The proportion of home deaths between 28th March and 31st December 2020 was compared with the same period in 2019. We used Poisson regression models to evaluate the association between decedent's area-based level of deprivation and risk of home death, as well as the interaction between deprivation and year of death, for each nation separately. RESULTS: Between the 28th March and 31st December 2020, 409,718 deaths were recorded in England, 46,372 in Scotland, 26,410 in Wales and 13,404 in Northern Ireland. All four nations showed an increase in the adjusted proportion of home deaths between 2019 and 2020, ranging from 21 to 28%. This increase was lowest for people living in the most deprived areas in all nations, with evidence of a deprivation gradient in England. CONCLUSIONS: The Covid-19 pandemic exacerbated a previously described socioeconomic inequality in place of death in the UK. Further research to understand the reasons for this change and if this inequality has been sustained is needed.

A population-based retrospective cohort study of end-of-life emergency department visits by people with dementia: multilevel modelling of individual- and service-level factors using linked data.

BACKGROUND: emergency department (ED) visits have inherent risks for people with dementia yet increase towards the end-of-life. Although some individual-level determinants of ED visits have been identified, little is known about service-level determinants. OBJECTIVE: to examine individual- and service-level factors associated with ED visits by people with dementia in the last year of life. METHODS: retrospective cohort study using hospital administrative and mortality data at the individual-level, linked to health and social care service data at the area-level across England. The primary outcome was number of ED visits in the last year of life. Subjects were decedents with dementia recorded on the death certificate, with at least one hospital contact in the last 3 years of life. RESULTS: of 74,486 decedents (60.5% women; mean age 87.1 years (standard deviation: 7.1)), 82.6% had at least one ED visit in their last year of life. Factors associated with more ED visits included: South Asian ethnicity (incidence rate ratio (IRR) 1.07, 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.02-1.13), chronic respiratory disease as the underlying cause of death (IRR 1.17, 95% CI 1.14-1.20) and urban residence (IRR 1.06, 95% CI 1.04-1.08). Higher socioeconomic position (IRR 0.92, 95% CI 0.90-0.94) and areas with higher numbers of nursing home beds (IRR 0.85, 95% CI 0.78-0.93)-but not residential home beds-were associated with fewer ED visits at the end-of-life. CONCLUSIONS: the value of nursing home care in supporting people dying with dementia to stay in their preferred place of care must be recognised, and investment in nursing home bed capacity prioritised.

Provision of palliative and end-of-life care in UK care homes during the COVID-19 pandemic: A mixed methods observational study with implications for policy.

Introduction: Little consideration has been given to how the provision of palliative and end-of-life care in care homes was affected by COVID-19. The aims of this study were to: (i) investigate the response of UK care homes in meeting the rapidly increasing need for palliative and end-of-life care during the COVID-19 pandemic and (ii) propose policy recommendations for strengthening the provision of palliative and end-of-life care within care homes. Materials and methods: A mixed methods observational study was conducted, which incorporated (i) an online cross-sectional survey of UK care homes and (ii) qualitative interviews with care home practitioners. Participants for the survey were recruited between April and September 2021. Survey participants indicating availability to participate in an interview were recruited using a purposive sampling approach between June and October 2021. Data were integrated through analytic triangulation in which we sought areas of convergence, divergence, and complementarity. Results: There were 107 responses to the survey and 27 interviews. We found that (i) relationship-centered care is crucial to high-quality palliative and end-of-life care within care homes, but this was disrupted during the pandemic. (ii) Care homes' ability to maintain high-quality relationship-centered care required key "pillars" being in place: integration with external healthcare systems, digital inclusion, and a supported workforce. Inequities within the care home sector meant that in some services these pillars were compromised, and relationship-centered care suffered. (iii) The provision of relationship-centered care was undermined by care home staff feeling that their efforts and expertise in delivering palliative and end-of-life care often went unrecognized/undervalued. Conclusion: Relationship-centered care is a key component of high-quality palliative and end-of-life care in care homes, but this was disrupted during the COVID-19 pandemic. We identify key policy priorities to equip care homes with the resources, capacity, and expertise needed to deliver palliative and end-of-life care: (i) integration within health and social care systems, (ii) digital inclusivity, (iii) workforce development, (iv) support for care home managers, and (v) addressing (dis)parities of esteem. These policy recommendations inform, extend, and align with policies and initiatives within the UK and internationally.

Inclusion of palliative and end of life care in health strategies aimed at integrated care: a documentary analysis [version 2; peer review: 2 approved].

Background: In England, Integrated Care Systems have been established to improve integration of care, as part of the NHS Long Term Plan. For people near the end of life, palliative care can improve integration of care. We aimed to understand whether and how palliative and end of life care was included in Integrated Care System strategies, and to consider priorities for strengthening this. Methods: Documentary analysis of Integrated Care System (ICS) strategies, using summative content analysis, was performed. Google searches were used to identify NHS Trust, Clinical Commissioning Group or ICS websites. We searched these websites to identify strategies. Key terms were used to identify relevant content. Themes were mapped onto an adapted logic model for integrated care. Results: 23 Integrated Care System strategy documents were identified. Of these, two did not mention any of the key terms, and six highlighted palliative and end of life care as either a priority, area of focus, or an ambition. While most (19/23) strategies included elements that could be mapped onto the adapted logic model for integrated care, the thread from enablers and components, to structures, processes, outcomes, and impact was incomplete. Conclusions: Greater prioritisation of palliative and end of life care within recently established Integrated Care Systems could improve outcomes for people near the end of life, as well as reduce reliance on acute hospital care. Integrated Care Systems should consider involving patients, the public and palliative care stakeholders in the ongoing development of strategies. For strategies to be effective, our adapted logic model can be used to outline how different components of care fit together to achieve defined outcomes and impact.

Adaptation and multicentre validation of a patient-centred outcome scale for people severely ill with COVID (IPOS-COV).

BACKGROUND: Patient-centred measures to capture symptoms and concerns have rarely been reported in severe COVID. We adapted and tested the measurement properties of the proxy version of the Integrated Palliative care Outcome Scale-IPOS-COV for severe COVID using psychometric approach. METHODS: We consulted experts and followed consensus-based standards for the selection of health status measurement instruments and United States Food and Drug Administration guidance for adaptation and analysis. Exploratory Factor Analysis and clinical perspective informed subscales. We tested the internal consistency reliability, calculated item total correlations, examined re-test reliability in stable patients, and also evaluated inter-rater reproducibility. We examined convergent and divergent validity of IPOS-COV with the Australia-modified Karnofsky Performance Scale and evaluated known-groups validity. Ability to detect change was examined. RESULTS: In the adaptation phase, 6 new items were added, 7 items were removed from the original measure. The recall period was revised to be the last 12-24 h to capture fast deterioration in COVID. General format and response options of the original Integrated Palliative care Outcome Scale were preserved. Data from 572 patients with COVID from across England and Wales seen by palliative care services were included. Four subscales were supported by the 4-factor solution explaining 53.5% of total variance. Breathlessness-Agitation and Gastro-intestinal subscales demonstrated good reliability with high to moderate (a = 0.70 and a = 0.67) internal consistency, and item-total correlations (0.62-0.21). All except the Flu subscale discriminated well between patients with differing disease severity. Inter-rater reliability was fair with ICC of 0.40 (0.3-0.5, 95% CI, n = 324). Correlations between the subscales and AKPS as predicted were weak (r = 0.13-0.26) but significant (p < 0.01). Breathlessness-Agitation and Drowsiness-Delirium subscales demonstrated good divergent validity. Patients with low oxygen saturation had higher mean Breathlessness-Agitation scores (M = 5.3) than those with normal levels (M = 3.4), t = 6.4 (186), p < 0.001. Change in Drowsiness-Delirium subscale correctly classified patients who died. CONCLUSIONS: IPOS-COV is the first patient-centred measure adapted for severe COVID to support timely management. Future studies could further evaluate its responsiveness and clinical utility with clinimetric approaches.

Communication about sexual orientation and gender between clinicians, LGBT+ people facing serious illness and their significant others: a qualitative interview study of experiences, preferences and recommendations.

BACKGROUND: Healthcare organisations have legal and ethical duties to reduce inequalities in access to healthcare services and related outcomes. However, lesbian, gay, bisexual and/or transgender (LGBT+) people continue to experience and anticipate discrimination in health and social care. Skilled communication is vital for quality person-centred care, but there is inconsistent provision of evidence-based clinician education on health needs and experiences of LGBT+ people to support this. This study aimed to identify key stakeholders' experiences, preferences and best practices for communication regarding sexual orientation, gender identity and gender history in order to reduce inequalities in healthcare. METHODS: Semistructured qualitative interviews with LGBT+ patients with serious illness, significant others and clinicians, recruited via UK-wide LGBT+ groups, two hospitals and one hospice in England. We analysed the interview data using reflexive thematic analysis. RESULTS: 74 stakeholders participated: 34 LGBT+ patients with serious illness, 13 significant others and 27 multiprofessional clinicians. Participants described key communication strategies to promote inclusive practice across three domains: (1) 'Creating positive first impressions and building rapport' were central to relationship building and enacted through routine use of inclusive language, avoiding potentially negative non-verbal signals and echoing terminology used by patients and caregivers; (2) 'Enhancing care by actively exploring and explaining the relevance of sexual orientation and gender identity', participants described the benefits of clinicians initiating these discussions, pursuing topics guided by the patient's response or expressed preferences for disclosure. Active involvement of significant others was encouraged to demonstrate recognition of the relationship; these individual level actions are underpinned by a foundation of (3) 'visible and consistent LGBT+ inclusiveness in care systems'. Although participants expressed hesitance talking about LGBT+ identities with individuals from some sociocultural and religious backgrounds, there was widespread support for institutions to adopt a standardised, LGBT+ inclusive, visibly supportive approach. CONCLUSIONS: Person-centred care can be enhanced by incorporating discussions about sexual orientation and gender identity into routine clinical practice. Inclusive language and sensitive exploration of relationships and identities are core activities. Institutions need to support clinicians through provision of adequate training, resources, inclusive monitoring systems, policies and structures. Ten inclusive communication recommendations are made based on the data.

The association between socioeconomic position and the symptoms and concerns of hospital inpatients seen by specialist palliative care: Analysis of routinely collected patient data.

BACKGROUND: Understanding how socioeconomic position influences the symptoms and concerns of patients approaching the end of life is important for planning more equitable care. Data on this relationship is lacking, particularly for patients with non-cancer conditions. AIM: To analyse the association between socioeconomic position and the symptoms and concerns of older adult patients seen by specialist palliative care. DESIGN: Secondary analysis of cross-sectional, routinely collected electronic patient data. We used multivariable linear regression with robust standard errors, to predict scores on the three subscales of the Integrated Palliative care Outcome Scale (IPOS; physical symptoms, emotional symptoms and communication and practical concerns) based on patient level of deprivation, measured using Index of Multiple Deprivation. SETTING/PARTICIPANTS: Consecutive inpatients aged 60 years and over, seen by specialist palliative care at two large teaching hospitals in London between 1st January 2016 and 31st December 2019. RESULTS: Seven thousand eight hundred and sixty patients were included, 38.3% had cancer. After adjusting for demographic and clinical characteristics, patients living in the most deprived areas had higher (worse) predicted mean scores on the communication and practical subscale than patients living in the least deprived areas, 5.38 (95% CI: 5.10, 5.65) compared to 4.82 (4.62, 5.02) respectively. This effect of deprivation diminished with increasing age. Deprivation was not associated with scores on the physical or emotional symptoms subscales. CONCLUSIONS: Targetting resources to address practical and communication concerns could be a strategy to reduce inequalities. Further research in different hospitals and across different settings using patient centred outcome measures is needed to examine inequalities.

Risk of suicide after diagnosis of severe physical health conditions: A retrospective cohort study of 47 million people.

Background: The diagnosis of a severe physical health condition can cause psychological distress and lead to severe depression. The association between severe physical health conditions and the risk of suicide, and how the risk of suicide changes in the months following diagnosis, are not clear. Methods: We estimated whether a diagnosis of severe physical health conditions is associated with an increase in the risk of death by suicide using a dataset based on the 2011 Census linked to hospital records and death registration records covering 47,354,696 people alive on 1 January 2017 in England. Patients diagnosed with a low-survival cancer, chronic ischaemic heart disease, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, or degenerative neurological condition were matched to individuals using socio-demographic characteristics from the Census. Using the Aalen-Johansen estimator, we estimated the cumulative incidence of death by suicide occurring between 1 January 2017 and 31 December 2021 (registered by 31 December 2021) in patients and matched controls, adjusted for other potential confounders using inverse probability weighting. Findings: Diagnosis of severe conditions was associated with an increased risk of dying by suicide. One year after diagnosis, the rate of suicide was 21.6 (95% confidence intervals: 14.9-28.4, number of events (N): 39) per 100,000 low-survival cancer patients compared to 9.5 (5.6-14.6, N:16) per 100,000 matched controls. For COPD patients, the one-year suicide rate was 22.4 (19.4-25.5, N:208) per 100,000 COPD patients (matched controls: 10.6, 8.3-13.0, N:85), for ischaemic heart disease 16.1 (14.1-18.2, N:225) per 100,000 patients (matched controls: 8.8, 7.1-10.4, N:128), for degenerative neurological conditions 114.5 (49.6-194.7, N:11) per 100,000 patients. The increase in risk was more pronounced in the first six months after diagnosis or first treatment. Interpretation: A diagnosis of severe physical illness is associated with higher suicide risk. The interaction of physical and mental illness emphasises the importance of collaborative physical and mental health care in these patients. Funding: The Office for National Statistics. KES is the Laing Galazka chair in palliative care at King's College London, funded by an endowment from Cicely Saunders International and the Kirby Laing Foundation.

Comparison of official reporting on assisted suicide and euthanasia across jurisdictions.

OBJECTIVES: Official data reports from countries where assisted suicide and euthanasia is legal are an important resource for discerning participation rates, patient safety and transparency in the way that assisted dying is legal. We aimed to identify what information is published in official data reports on assisted suicide and euthanasia across jurisdictions. METHODS: We searched for official data reports from every jurisdiction where assisted suicide or euthanasia is legal. Searches were conducted on these countries' official health authority websites as well as on mainstream search engines. The data measures included within each report were described in four categories: participation data, patient characteristics, clinician characteristics, and drugs and dying process. RESULTS: We found that 16 jurisdictions where assisted suicide or euthanasia is currently legal regularly publish data reports regarding its practice. The information included within these official reports varies greatly, with few measures published across all or most jurisdictions. CONCLUSIONS: Differences in the kinds of information published within official reports on assisted suicide and euthanasia makes comparing the practice of assisted suicide and euthanasia across jurisdictions challenging. Many jurisdictions fail to report data measures, which could be valuable to the understanding of assisted suicide and euthanasia practices within that country. Improving data reporting across jurisdictions where assisted suicide and euthanasia is legal, for example, through establishing minimum requirements for data collection and reporting, is an important step towards ensuring patient safety and the transparent practice of assisted suicide and euthanasia.